|
|
Opinion
Moral Policing by the State
by Bijoyeta Das
 If
we view the state as a fossilized remnant of Man's not to distant vile
and brutish past, then it is all right to imbue it with the right to
apply the moral principle in matters of governance. Modern Man is
rational and this invests him/her with the right to free choice. Often
the more fortunate mistake the poverty of means that are the outcome of
historical wrongs or mere chance with poverty of thought and the lack of
capacity. This fires them with philanthropic urges. Needless to state,
the existing order is very much a part of their scheme of things as this
accords stability to their circumscribed existence. This story runs on
in its endless periodicity. The hierarchy remains though the players
continually change roles. The underlying script is rerun, only, each
time it gets subtler and more in tune with the illusions of the times.
This sets the agenda for those at the helm of affairs to provide for all
manner of laws and regulations and the generally intrusive behavior of
the state that scarce does anyone any good. The above sets the tenor for
the enduring debate on the reasonableness (rather the lack of it) of
moral policing indulged in by the state.
Not getting into semantics one can confidently assert that the State as
it has evolved over time is a necessary evil begot by Man's own selfish
proclivities. Hence, it must limit itself to those functions which are
essential. The counterpoise to this may then be as to who is to decide
on what is essential. The answer is to be had in referring to natural
justice, which simplistically put, confers on all individuals the right
to unimpeded physical existence. This latter would include the right to
life, property and the freedom to exert ones legitimate corporeal
property and mental faculties to uses one deems fit in ways that do not
impinge on the rights of others. Matters spiritual and by extension
moral are not to be trusted to the State apparatus for this would lead
to a creeping hegemony of one class of people – the states functionaries
- over all others. Whosoever is in the hot seat at a point in time would
then be invested with the right to thrust their follies and foibles on
an unwilling population.
Morality is an article of faith. It cannot be enforced by fiat. It
exists within the confines of an individual's self. It is seldom evident
outwardly. When confronted by a situation that forbids specific
expression, action in which it is manifest simply goes underground.
When the public is sufficiently incensed by arbitrary moral tenets
enforced by the State it could result in hostile retaliation where the
wrong to be corrected may express itself in a form more virulent than in
a less restrictive atmosphere. Ample evidence of this human trait is
observable in the rebellious nature of teenagers. This is an inherent
human trait that refuses to be confined to a niche segment but endures
in the most unexpected of quarters.
Again, connotations of morality differ widely among segments of the
population and constituent's therein. Rarely, if ever, will two
individuals hold an identical point of view on an issue. This range of
diversity does not allow for exact articulation on a point without which
it is impossible to make moral pronouncements that do not smack of
arbitrariness.
Across societies, individual or collectives thereof attach importance to
alternate moral issues with varying degrees of intensity. What seems
innocuous or of little consequence to an entity may be of utmost
importance to another. Collectively these alternate phenomena make for a
formidable array that encompasses the whole gamut of human proclivities
and aspirations. How then is the State to choose from the myriad of
issues and to what extent must the chosen list be administered. The
situation becomes more vexatious when we consider the fact that often
the views held by different constituents of the polity are variegated or
even diametrically opposed. Any attempt to legislate or rule on this
count could lead to conflict rather than serve the purpose of social
solidarity.
Democracy is no answer to this conundrum. There is something called
brute majority as opposed to the enlightened minority. Democracy has
given way to mobocracy in recent times. Vast swathes of the
enlightened population are alienated from the political process and opt
to stay out of the ballot process altogether. The sensibilities of the
mob in any case is several notches lower than the individual and this
makes for perverse choices when it comes to issues rooted in morality.
Any pronouncement based on the contention of it having the backing of
majority opinion is seriously flawed.
These are some of the philosophical arguments that militate against the
state arrogating unto itself the right to proffer judgment on moral
issues. In any case, there is something intrinsically abhorrent about
any entity dictating on moral precepts that possess little or no
scientific basis.
Another factor to take into account is the fact that Man is everywhere
intrinsically hypocritical. He/She would always like to project a
conformist countenance rather than the inner self with all its attendant
urges and cravings. This leads people to articulate in public what they
willfully disregard in private. For those who are less inclined to such
subterfuge this could be tantamount to unnecessary hindrance on free
thought and expression.
In passing, we may refer to forms of moral policing by the state and
concrete instances of this phenomenon. The most common instance of moral
policing is to be had when the state makes pronouncements on the manner
of sexual views and norms that its citizens must adhere to. This ranges
from innocuous pronouncements on public exhibition of amorous advances
to extreme positions on the conferment of gay rights and to issues that
border on religious beliefs such as the admissibility or otherwise of
the medical termination of pregnancy. This crimps the space for free
expression of the individual and leads to a repressed psyche, which
often expresses itself in socially deviant behavior elsewhere. What is
lost track of here is that the reality of the individual is sacrificed
at the altar of an amorphous construct called society, which in itself
is fickle and scarce subject to the laws of certainty.
The other contentious field relates to that of religion. More blood has
been spilt on grounds of religion than on any other count in the short
history of civilized Man. This continues to be one of the most volatile
aspects of our existing social reality. Grave injustice has been
committed on the free articulation of views and actions relating to the
communion of mortals with the supernatural. and almost inevitably this
has lead to the spilling of precious human blood in the here and now.
Even today, the atrocities perpetrated by a subset of the Moslem world
consisting of talibanized elements is sought to be combated by the
evangelist crusade of resurgent Protestantism. The cases are altogether
too numerous to go into here. All we can say is that the attitude of the
State on how best to tackle festering political and social wounds has
been dictated more by religious consideration and convoluted ideas of
morality rather than on the basis of any incisive introspection on the
issues that beget such virulent forms of protest and equally oppressive
retribution.
Another trend noticeable lately has been the increasing penchant of the
state to conjure up the moral imperative under the omnibus concept of
public interest. It then seizes the moral prerogative to legislate on
all manner of social political and economic issues. On closer inspection
of the policy measures that emanate from such interventions, it is found
that the public good is seldom upheld and most gains are cornered by
canny and vocal segments of the privileged classes. The policy issues
range from licensing, subsidies and workfare to positive discrimination
and ethical issues related to advertisements. This spills over to the
food and drink we imbibe, the words we are allowed to author or read,
our choice of entertainment and much else besides. In fact, one begins
to wonder where exactly the state makes a transition from playing nanny
to becoming the keeper of our conscience. The upshot of all this is that
in the ensuing populism and emotively charged atmosphere, harder issues
related to good governance is lost sight of.
Therefore, we flounder from one iniquitous and inefficient system to
another. In fact this is the sum total of the State's achievements down
history and freedom is still an elusive word for much of mankind.
In conclusion, one can contend that there is no reason in the state to
usurp the citizen's right to personal choice in matters private. Our
spiritual and moral imperatives are ours alone. Just as we cannot impose
our moral virtues on others, so must we be accountable to ourselves for
the transgressions we commit. The state can only be a helpless bystander
and not exacerbate the fragile peace that the individual covenants with
society.
September 24,
2006
Top
|
Opinion
The Week of September 24, 2006
Is Osama Dead? Never Mind, Terrorism is Still
Alive! by Rajinder Puri
Mahatma Gandhi: Lost and Forgotten in India
by Dr. Subhash Kapila
Confluence of Poetry, Evolution, Economics and
Terrorism by Gaurang Bhatt, MD
India-Pakistan "Bhai-Bhai" by Col.
Rahul K. Bhonsle
Does Human Culture Matter in the Modern World?
by TA Ramesh
Moral Policing by the State by Bijoyeta Das
Wailing Womb, Weeping Heart by Satya Chaitanya
Mahalaya: Invoking the Mother Goddess by
Aparna Chatterjee
The Desecration of Temples and Other Acts by CR
Gopalakrishna
Heaven on Earth Ravaged by VK Joshi
Chemistry of Tulasi by Dr. V. Sankaran Nair
How to make Your Signature Lucky? by Pt.
Aaadietya Pandey
Dr. Varghese Kurien: Idol for Indian Youth by
Bijoyeta Das
From Drums of Phantom to SMS by VK Joshi
Gandhigiri Works! Lage Raho Munna Bhai by Ragini
Puri
Remembering Hrishikesh Mukherjee by Yamini
Ayyagari
Normal Childhood Behavior Misconstrued by
Gary Direnfeld
HIV /AIDS - Prevention and Creating Awareness -
Role of Media by Jyoti Singh
Seeking a Say in Sex by Lubana Yasmin Palia
The New Womanomics by Sreedevi Jacob
Grannies Get Together by Elayne Clift
Women's March to Freedom by Mehru Jaffer
Breaking Tradition's Clay Feet by Surekha
Kadapa-Bose
Yohhh! Boloji by Dr. Amitabh Mitra
God's Grace by Arya Bhushan
Affirming Diversity, Resisting Decisiveness
by Julia Dutta
Why I am Missing my Roots? by Anisa Chaudhary
|
|
